Will move Centre for Punjab-like anti-sacrilege law for country, AAP govt tells Akal Takht | Chandigarh News

Amritsar/Chandigarh: On the last day of Akal Takht’s one-month deadline to incorporate changes in the amended Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, Punjab govt told the supreme temporal seat of the Sikhs on Wednesday that it will take up with the Centre the enactment of an anti-sacrilege law for the whole of India on the lines of Punjab’s law, and that discussions were already underway.Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Inderbir Singh Nijjar, accompanied by Amritsar deputy commissioner Dalwinderjit Singh, visited the Akal Takht secretariat and handed over a 25-page document, along with forwarding letters from Punjab govt, to secretariat in charge, Bagicha Singh, on Wednesday.Nijjar said that all objections raised by Akal Takht regarding the amended Act have been addressed in the revised draft.However, the Akal Takht secretariat issued a statement at night, saying: “Today, Punjab govt did not submit any revised draft of the anti-sacrilege act but responded to the orders sent from Akal Takht on June 29 and July 4.”Akal Takht has strong objections to the amended anti-sacrilege Act, maintaining that the changes were made by Punjab govt without taking its consent or that of Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) and Guru Khalsa Panth. It accuses govt of trying to meddle in religious affairs.On June 29, Akal Takht summoned all Sikh lawmakers — an unprecedented move — and gave Punjab govt a month’s time to incorporate the changes it suggested. Among the objections raised by Akal Takht include the use of the word ‘Saroop’ instead of ‘Bir’, assigning unique identification numbers to Saroops of Sri Guru Granth Sahib, defining the duties and responsibilities of custodians, and provisions related to custodianship.On Wednesday, after govt representatives handed over the documents to Akal Takht, the media advisor to officiating Jathedar Giani Kuldip Singh Gargajj said govt has delayed initiating communication. Meaningful coordination with Akal Takht should have been established during the one-month period so that serious deliberations on the issue could have progressed, he said.He suggested that further discussions should be conducted through a joint committee comprising representatives of Sri Akal Takht Sahib, Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), and Punjab govt to reach a consensus.The govt representatives were also informed that Akal Takht had learnt through media reports that Punjab govt may introduce further amendments to Jagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar (Amendment) Act, 2026 during the assembly session scheduled to begin on Aug 3.According to the media adviser, govt representatives were cautioned not to “hastily proceed with further legislative amendments” and first obtain the opinion and consent of Akal Takht and SGPC.Punjab govt’s response to Akal Takht on Wednesday said that amendments would be made regarding the use of terms such as “Sri Bir Sahib” and “Paawan Saroop of Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji”. It clarified that the Act and Rules do not restrict the use of religious terminology approved by Guru Panth, SGPC and Akal Takht.On the jurisdiction reservations raised by Akal Takht, govt said: “Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008 is confined to Punjab jurisdiction. In this regard, state govt shall take it up with central govt to enact a law applicable to the whole of India.”On the concern that heads of deras or groups should also be named in FIRs if their followers are accused of sacrilege, govt said the Act already provides for action against institutions, deras, sects and other organisations where sacrilege is committed through conspiracy or by inciting followers. It said such responsibility would, however, have to be established through investigation.Govt said the objective of the law is to ensure strict action against those who deliberately commit sacrilege, while preventing misuse against innocent custodians, Sewaks and Sewadars.Clarifying the definition of ‘custodian’, govt said it covers individuals, institutions and gurdwara committees entrusted with or responsible for the protection and Sewa Sambhal of the Saroop of Guru Granth Sahib. It said amendments to the definition would be carried out through the assembly after approval by Akal Takht.Govt reiterated that the Act does not interfere with Sikh Rehat Maryada or religious traditions. It said matters relating to Sikh Rehat Maryada fall within the domain of Akal Takht and SGPC and clarified that no breach of Sikh Rehat Maryada has been converted into a criminal offence under the law.On the UID and central register provisions, govt said these mechanisms would remain under SGPC’s jurisdiction. It said each Saroop would be assigned an encrypted identification number with prospective effect through a process determined by SGPC, while records relating to printing, publication, reverential placement, distribution and supply would be maintained in physical and electronic form.Govt clarified that the central register would not be public information and that the digital record system would not be treated as being in the public domain. Investigating agencies requiring such information would have to seek it from SGPC through due process.On concerns regarding the use of sacred Birs, Sainchis, Pothis or Gutka Sahibs during legal proceedings, govt said Rule 3(8) specifically provides that the Saroop of Guru Granth Sahib or any part thereof shall not be physically sought or produced before any court, police station or other office.Regarding demands for special fast-track courts, govt said appropriate steps would be taken in a timely manner. It pointed to provisions for expediting proceedings, including time-bound sanction for prosecution and day-to-day trial, with cases preferably to be concluded within six months from framing of charges.On accidental damage to Saroops, govt said provisions have been incorporated to ensure immediate reporting by custodians where incidents occur without deliberate intent or mens rea.Govt said accidental acts or incidents without malicious intent would not fall within the definition of sacrilege and that criminal liability would arise only in cases involving deliberate acts and guilty intent. It said safeguards under the Rules are intended to ensure action against those responsible for sacrilege while protecting persons engaged in genuine religious service.